Prime Minister`s question to former presidents has escalated domestic  political debate to a level that may pose a threat to Armenia`s  national security

ArmInfo. According to political scientist Suren Surenyants,  Prime Minister Nikol  Pashinyan has escalated the domestic political debate to a level that  could threaten Armenia's national security, with his question to  former presidents of the Republic of Armenia.

 "His words, 'If I dragged Armenia into war, why was an 18-year-old  Armenian soldier outside the sovereign territory of the Republic of  Armenia in 2018,' sounded like a direct repetition of Baku  propaganda, disguised within domestic political arguments. This  formulation essentially confirms Azerbaijan's main thesis that  Armenia 'forcibly occupied Azerbaijani territories.' Essentially,  Pashinyan not only distorts the essence of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue  but also speaks out against Armenia on international platforms,  portraying us as an 'aggressor' and 'occupier.' This is not only  politically dangerous but could also have legal consequences," the  political scientist believes.

He added that every word the Armenian leader says is perceived as an  official position and can be used against Armenia. Surenyants noted  that Pashinyan's words distort the essence of the Nagorno-Karabakh  conflict. "The Armenian soldier stationed in Artsakh was not on  'foreign territory.' He was defending the security of the Armenian  people and the right of the people of Artsakh to self-determination,  which is a fundamental principle of international law. The  Nagorno-Karabakh issue is based on the right to self- determination,  outlined in several important international documents, including the  UN Charter (Article 1.2)-the principle of equal rights and  self-determination of peoples; UN General Assembly Resolution No.  1514 (1960)-the Declaration on the Liberation of Peoples from  Colonialism, which enshrines the right of peoples to freely choose  their future; and the Helsinki Final Act (1975), according to which  equal rights and self-determination of peoples are an integral  foundation of international relations.

 These documents prove that the struggle of the Armenians of Artsakh  can under no circumstances be considered an 'occupation,' but rather  a legitimate right to ensure their own existence and future," the  political scientist emphasized. Surenyants believes that Pashinyan  has set an extremely dangerous precedent, as such statements, made  within the context of domestic political disputes, are transformed  into external threats. Azerbaijan has long been trying to convince  the world that this is a matter of "occupation." "When the Armenian  leader uses such language, he unwittingly reinforces this propaganda,  effectively speaking out against Armenia on international platforms.  Nikol Pashinyan's remarks demonstrate that words used in domestic  political discussions can become a factor threatening national  security. Armenian society and the opposition must clearly state that  the Nagorno-Karabakh issue was never a matter of "occupation." It was  about the right to self-determination and the security of the  people," the expert concluded.